Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40066511›Full record

SynthesisClinical and experimental dental research2025

Artificial Intelligence in Temporomandibular Joint Disorders: An Umbrella Review.

Vini Mehta, Snehasish Tripathy, Toufiq Noor, Ankita Mathur

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical and experimental dental research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Vini MehtaFaculty of Dentistry, University of Ibn al-Nafis for Medical Sciences, San'a, Yemen.ORCID 0000-0003-4174-907X
Snehasish TripathyDepartment of Dental Research Cell, Dr. D. Y. Patil Dental College and Hospital, Dr. D. Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, Pune, India.
Toufiq NoorDepartment of Dental Research Cell, Dr. D. Y. Patil Dental College and Hospital, Dr. D. Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, Pune, India.
Ankita MathurDepartment of Dental Research Cell, Dr. D. Y. Patil Dental College and Hospital, Dr. D. Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, Pune, India.

Funding

The authors received no specific funding for this work.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesGiven the complexity of temporomandibular joint disorders (TMDs) and their overlapping symptoms with other conditions, an accurate diagnosis necessitates a thorough examination, which can be time-consuming and resource-intensive. Consequently, innovative diagnostic tools are required to increase TMD diagnosis efficiency and precision. Therefore, the purpose of this umbrella review was to examine the existing evidence about the usefulness of artificial intelligence (AI) in TMD diagnosis. MATERIAL AND

methodsA comprehensive search of the literature was performed from inception to November 30, 2024, in PubMed-MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus databases. This review evaluated systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) that reported TMD patients/datasets, any AI model as intervention, no treatment, placebo as comparator and accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, or predictive value of AI models as outcome. The extracted data were complemented with narrative synthesis.

resultsOut of 1497 search results, this umbrella review included five studies. One of the five articles was an SR while the other four were SRMAs. Three studies focused on patients with temporomandibular joint (TMJ) problems as a group, whereas two were specific to temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis (TMJOA). The included studies reported the use of imaging datasets as samples, including cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and panoramic radiography. The studies reported an accuracy level ranging from 0.59 to 1. Four studies reported sensitivity levels ranging from 0.76 to 0.80. Four studies reported specificity values ranging from 0.63 to 0.95 for TMJ conditions. However, only one study provided the area under the curve (AUC) in the diagnosis of TMDs.

conclusionsAI has the ability to provide faster, more accurate, sensitive, and objective diagnosis of TMJ condition. However, the performance is determined on the AI models and datasets used. Therefore, before implementing AI models in clinical practice, it is essential for researchers to extensively refine and evaluate the AI application.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceTemporomandibular Joint DisordersHumansSensitivity and Specificityartificial Intelligencemachine learningtemporomandibular joint disorders

Identifiers

PMID40066511
PMCPMC11894261

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.